In one version of the story, India was created in 1947 and became a Republic with the adoption of the Constitution on January 26, 1950.
In another version, India, or Bharat, has existed for millennia.
Which version is correct? As with many opposing narratives surrounding complex questions, both contain elements of truth and falsehood.
The Constitution, which established the Indian State, was indeed adopted in 1950. However, it, along with the contemporary Indian State, largely continues the British system that governed India. The structures of administration, the functioning of the courts, and the workings of the legislature are largely in line with what the British had set up. The Constitution is mainly based on the Government of India Act of 1935, which was enacted by the British Parliament without Indian representation. Thus, the current Indian Republic can be said to have originated not in 1950, but at least from 1935, or even as far back as the 19th century when the British took control of India, dismantled old systems, and established new structures for colonial governance.
To this day, the relationship between government officials and the governed reflects a colonial mindset. The colonial state was never designed for "jan seva"; it was created with a singular purpose: extortion-specifically, how to effectively extract tax revenue from the people while maintaining control through force. After all, the official state representative at the district level is still called the "Collector." Despite having an elected government at the top, few fundamental changes have occurred in the overall state apparatus we inherited. The power of the viceroy has been replaced by an elected parliament and cabinet of ministers, yet the mechanisms and attitudes of administration and governance remain largely unchanged. The Indian system was created by the British to govern the "natives" who needed to be controlled and civilised, not to be served. Many Indians would agree that the current system still reflects that ethos and often fails to serve ordinary citizens. Few people wish to interact with the police, judiciary, or bureaucracy, yet these institutions burden them. For instance, despite slogans like "defund the police," experiences with law enforcement in America are still considerably better than those in India. An Indian often finds themselves supplicating before the "sentries of the law difference between a state designed by citizens to serve themselves, as seen or resorting to bribery for basic services. This highlights a fundamental in the evolution of local government in the U.S.. versus a colonial state created to control subjects.
This is the Second Republic-an "Indian State" that traces its origins to British times and continues into "independent India," largely as a continuation of the colonial state in its structures and institutions. It is designed not for "jan seva" but for extraction and control. Independence and the Constitution merely legitimised colonial institutions and further embedded prejudices against the traditional Indian republic.
What, then, is the First Republic? Contrary to the colonial narrative, India did not magically constitute itself after the British arrived. Various states governed the region throughout history, some empires even larger than the territories controlled by the British. These states lasted much longer than the British Empire or the modern Indian State and had well-developed systems of governance and relationships with their societies. These systems evolved natively, reflecting the "law of the land," rather than being externally imposed structures created by foreign conquerors for their own benefit. This local basis of power ensured that governance remained responsive to the populace, unlike in modern-day India.
Traditional Indian governance was radically decentralised and local-power devolved upward from the village level. Villages and clusters of villages managed their own education systems, water works, land records, and dispute resolution. The role of kings was limited, which is why kingdom boundaries could change without impacting ordinary people's lives. These systems operated on dharma rather than solely on fear of external law enforcement.
Hindu (943)
Agriculture (125)
Ancient (1103)
Archaeology (806)
Architecture (567)
Art & Culture (931)
Biography (732)
Buddhist (550)
Cookery (165)
Emperor & Queen (584)
Islam (245)
Jainism (323)
Literary (889)
Mahatma Gandhi (393)
Send as free online greeting card
Email a Friend
Visual Search
Manage Wishlist